7 Annotations

language hat  •  Link

I'm confused.
Pepys seems to talk about Arthur Haselrigge (el) and Mrs. Haslerigge (le). Was she really married to him? And why is there no information available about her? I know Charles had a lot of mistresses, but it seems odd she's only mentioned by Pepys. She doesn't show up, for instance, in the list of royal mistresses and their offspring in The English Royal Family of America from Jamestown to the American Revolution, by Michael A Beatty.

CGS  •  Link

It seems the dates be wrong for this lady [wife of sir A.H.] to be a cumly mistress to entice a well seasoned Roue in to begotting a childe of a 30ish maid, far too olde, married 1640/1643.
This lass, along with many [many?]others did not have the savvy to wrest a incum from our Charley, therefore did not warrant a place in history.

CGS  •  Link

both spellings be in use [dyslexic?]
see 'The Diary of Thomas Burton: 28 February 1658-9', Diary of Thomas Burton esq, volume 3: January - March 1659 (1828), pp. 503-48. URL: http://british.history.ac.uk/report.asp?compid=36…. Date accessed: 11 November 2005.
also next day march 1:
interesting diary of what the house be telling about the resolving the ruling problem.

Terry Foreman  •  Link

language hat, apparently you have resolved your confusion. Among the court "news" Pepys was told 17 October 1662 on returning to London from Brampton by Creed and Ferrers was "that Mrs. Haslerigge, the great beauty, is got with child, and now brought to bed, and lays it to the King or the Duke of York." Neither of the royal brothers owned paternity.

Log in to post an annotation.

If you don't have an account, then register here.


Chart showing the number of references in each month of the diary’s entries.